Literature DB >> 20373433

Fast three-dimensional dual echo dixon technique improves fat suppression in breast MRI.

Huong Le-Petross1, Vikas Kundra, Janio Szklaruk, Wei Wei, Gabriel N Hortobagyi, Jingfei Ma.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare qualitative and quantitative measures of the contrast-enhanced dual-echo Dixon technique with the commonly used standard three-dimensional (3D) gradient echo (spectrally selective fat suppression) technique (SS-FS) in breast MRI exams (bMRI).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 19 women, with prescheduled bMRI exam, were recruited to our study between 2006 and 2008. Dixon and standard SS-SF techniques were used on both breasts of each patient. Image quality was rated in five categories: fat suppression quality, fat suppression uniformity, lesion margin clarity, lesion visibility, and axillary visibility. For quantitative assessment, we calculated the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of lesion to breast, SNR efficiency, and CNR efficiency.
RESULTS: Of 19 patients evaluated, 13 had a primary breast malignancy and 6 had benign lesions or negative exams. Dixon images were rated higher in four of five qualitative categories (P < 0.0001) and required a shorter scan time. Dixon images yielded significantly higher SNR (43.8) and CNR (40.1) values than did 3DGRE images (SNR = 34.8, CNR = 25.3; P < 0.05). SNR efficiency (36.30) and CNR efficiency (33.79) values for Dixon images were also higher than were 3DGRE images (SNR efficiency =25.7, CNR efficiency = 19.1; P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Dixon images were superior to the standard SS-SF images in both qualitative and quantitative assessment of 19 bMRI exams. The Dixon technique could replace standard SS-SF technique in bMRI exam, after our findings have been confirmed in future studies with a larger sample size. (c) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20373433     DOI: 10.1002/jmri.22067

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 1053-1807            Impact factor:   4.813


  12 in total

1.  The Dixon technique and the frequency-selective fat suppression technique in three-dimensional T1 weighted MRI of the liver: a comparison of contrast-to-noise ratios of hepatocellular carcinomas-to-liver.

Authors:  Y Takatsu; T Akasaka; T Miyati
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  A comparison of shimming techniques for optimizing fat suppression in MR mammography.

Authors:  Yasuo Takatsu; Kengo Nishiyama; Tosiaki Miyati; Hideto Miyano; Mariko Kajihara; Thai Akasaka
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2013-06-01

3.  A mask method to assess the uniformity of fat suppression in phantom studies.

Authors:  Yasuo Takatsu; Masafumi Nakamura; Kenichiro Yamamura; Satoshi Sawa; Masaki Asahara; Michitaka Honda; Tosiaki Miyati
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2019-08-17

4.  Fat suppression techniques for breast MRI: Dixon versus spectral fat saturation for 3D T1-weighted at 3 T.

Authors:  Anastasia Kalovidouri; Natacha Firmenich; Benedicte M A Delattre; Marlise Picarra; Christoph D Becker; Xavier Montet; Diomidis Botsikas
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2017-06-22       Impact factor: 3.469

5.  Bilateral breast MRI by use of dual-source parallel radiofrequency excitation and image-based shimming at 3 Tesla: improvement in homogeneity on fat-suppression imaging.

Authors:  Kinya Ishizaka; Fumi Kato; Satoshi Terae; Suzuko Mito; Noriko Oyama-Manabe; Tamotsu Kamishima; Mitsuhiro Nakanishi; Hiroyuki Sugimori; Hiroyuki Hamaguchi; Hiroki Shirato
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2014-06-26

6.  Fat saturation in dynamic breast MRI at 3 Tesla: is the Dixon technique superior to spectral fat saturation? A visual grading characteristics study.

Authors:  P Clauser; K Pinker; T H Helbich; P Kapetas; M Bernathova; P A T Baltzer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-05-04       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Novel High Spatiotemporal Resolution Versus Standard-of-Care Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Breast MRI: Comparison of Image Quality.

Authors:  Courtney K Morrison; Leah C Henze Bancroft; Wendy B DeMartini; James H Holmes; Kang Wang; Ryan J Bosca; Frank R Korosec; Roberta M Strigel
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 6.016

Review 8.  Magnetic resonance imaging of pediatric muscular disorders: recent advances and clinical applications.

Authors:  Hee Kyung Kim; Diana M Lindquist; Suraj D Serai; Yogesh K Mariappan; Lily L Wang; Arnold C Merrow; Kiaran P McGee; Richard L Ehman; Tal Laor
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 2.303

9.  Fat suppression strategies in MR imaging of breast cancer at 3.0 T: comparison of the two-point Dixon technique and the frequency selective inversion method.

Authors:  Wakako Kaneko Mikami; Toshiki Kazama; Hirotaka Sato; Hajime Yokota; Takashi Higashide; Takuro Horikoshi; Ken Motoori; Yukimasa Miyazawa; Takeshi Nagashima; Takashi Uno
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 2.374

10.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI at 7T and 3T: an intra-individual comparison study.

Authors:  Gisela L G Menezes; Bertine L Stehouwer; Dennis W J Klomp; Tijl A van der Velden; Maurice A A J van den Bosch; Floortje M Knuttel; Vincent O Boer; Wybe J M van der Kemp; Peter R Luijten; Wouter B Veldhuis
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2016-01-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.